that was great. thank you. thank you. how to judge you according to the law or according to conscience , the german will say according to the law, the russian will answer according to his conscience. hello today, we gathered our thoughts on law and russian legal culture bishop savva zelenogradsky deputy administrator of the moscow patriarchate candidate of theology specialist in canon law smiles at us andrey alexandrovich klishas head of the federation council committee on constitutional legislation state building. i said it all doctor historical sciences. hello dear friends. well, the theme is clear. i want to continue . this one, it seems to me, is such an indicator of legal culture, someone once

said to me that an italian would say according to the law. we can agree, but the american will not understand the question. here, in fact. my first question is to what extent this characterizes the legal culture. and what do you generally think about this? well, andrei, look at vladyka. let's start with you. parts, probably, characterizes, because in itself opposition according to conscience or according to the law, but quite artificial. in general, legally it should reflect people's idea of ​​justice. and if the law somehow deviates from this idea, then, yes, it arises in people. e desire to be judged somehow not according to the law of conscience. yes, yes, you need to deal with your conscience. what is conscience? uh-huh, because, well, and in law they are discussing it , there is conscience as a purely subjective idea, yes, of a person of justice, and

there is as a kind of collective idea of ​​\u200b\u200bwhat is now right and should uh-huh yes and if our law approaches this ideal, let's put it this way, then such opposition does not arise, and it really looks rather artificial. and if people believe that the law is somehow trying to regulate some kind of relationship, then yes, and i probably agree with you that, unfortunately, most people still have a question. if here i put it like this, as you put it at the beginning of the program. eh, they will say that you judge me according to my conscience, but look , vladyka, after all, the antinomy of law and grace. yes, she is like that biblical. yes, the old testament the new testament is there the word on the law of grace of metropolitan hilarion. if we are talking about russian culture, maybe this is not such an artificial opposition, as andrei alexandrovich is now saying, do you think the laws of grace and the laws of conscience are

still, uh, different couples, but i continued andrei alexandrovich’s thought what? well, look at the law - this is a chipper. yes, which prevents us from flying beyond what is possible if the bump stop is held in the middle of the road. it's clearly out of place here. am the law actually that church law that secular law is intended, in theory, to initially make it so that it is good for society as a whole and for each person individually, so that people's lives are for the better, if it is a law that prevents this or leads somewhere in the other direction, then it means , it does not quite fulfill its functions, but more than that, if it is known. eh, the patristic saying of st. isaac the syrian is very vividly expressed in almost the same way, well, almost the same a little differently, but nevertheless also an amplifier for chrysostom about that if the lord will judge us, uh, in fairness, the guys of justice are with us. nothing good will happen, therefore, we

are talking about the fact that everything happens to a person in truth. yes, in fact , initially our law in russia was called the truth. yes, and this is true. let's talk about this some more. i just want to ask you, how does a person who grew up in french culture, and here is a frenchman. i will not answer. i still lived there, i already live in russia for most of my life, i don’t remember how i left the answer. ok then. let's continue. here see famous story. fyodor nikiforovich spitter is a famous russian lawyer lawyer, who, by the way, was famous for his long rather lengthy lawyer speeches and one of his most famous speeches was extremely brief. the priest was tried. the priest was at fault. the jury come out spitter and says lord juror . yes, the priest or to blame. he himself admits it. i want to tell you, only one thing in front of you is a person who for many years in confession forgave you your numerous sins. i ask that you

forgive him one sin once today, unanimously, i believe, or whatever it is that he was justified. vladyka it's like is it right or not? man is called to forgive. yes, when we think we are in the lord, i say that forgive us just as we forgive the sins of others, but these are not legal categories, this is legal for our own forgiveness. eh, this category is divine. excuse me. it means, uh, to actually say that this is something we don't consider in his past. as part of his life. although part of life was the forgiveness of conscience laws - all of this from different categories can be forgiven completely, that is, by a jury. he was found not guilty. hmm, he was found not guilty or exonerated. as far as i remember, this is how accurate the question was. i will come next time, as they say. if we talk about some such specific examples, i am afraid that we

will not have such an interesting and meaningful conversation, because each time we will have to go deeper, there is matter. i want you say what is needed. uh, speaking of a specific example, always analyze two things, if it's a crime, right? objective subjective side subjective side is different. yes, there is intent, there is negligence. and then there is such a thing as the degree of public danger. yes, in this case, if i don't know the details there. i know this is a joke, but yes , well-known historical ones, but i believe that the jury proceeded from what is the public danger yes, what he did and whether this person can go again for such a crime, and therefore, yes, he was rather exonerated from liability. although in general, the jury assumes guilty not guilty. exactly. yes, look, here, we actually wanted to. i wanted us to talk about legal culture as well, yes, and so usually, when this anecdote , uh, recalls a historical one, yes or an example, and this one recalls it, as an example that characterizes

russian legal culture. here. let's define a little theory what a legal culture is. correct me by analogy if this is not the case with the political culture of a political scientist, and i will say from the fact that there is a set of values ​​of representations, yes, which affects , let's say, how political culture. political processes and political institutions, and therefore, in different political cultures, the same political institutions will work differently, and the american french parliament, great britain there of any other country called democratic. here political processes will go differently. even if formally everything is very similar, because different political cultures are different value systems, legal culture, as i understand it, as a similar category. yes, this is a system of ideas, yes, attitudes towards the law in society. and then i have a question. here is the political culture, while we are not talking about the extent of its influence on legal institutions and processes. how big is uh, huge huge because the law. of course, this is such a kind of material

expression. yes, the idea of ​​the state on how to regulate some kind of relationship that arises between people, and it's just that the laws are not the product. yes, if you compare how this or that product corresponds to your ideal idea about it, you will always have a huge gap, a huge distance. and here is the size of this distance. it allows you to do. this is the opposition according to the law or according to conscience. yes, in some ideal model , the law just reflects the idea of ​​justice that exists here and now. well, let's tell. at the same time, that this is still a representation of justice, it changes and in society, too, yes, the idea of ​​​​justice, which there were on this 100-200. or are there 500 years ago different from what people are considered fair

today. yes it is there, uh, god has no volatility. yes, but for people in our kind of world in society in the state, these ideas change and therefore the law is also constantly changing. in a sense , always catching up creating this gap. this is one reason. why can you always say that either by law or by justice, and the second and this is probably here for me uh-huh how for a practicing lawyer and for a parliamentarian. this is very important. mostly injustice arises as a result of the right application. yes , therefore, when people say judge me according to my conscience. yes, you apply the law to me in good conscience, yes, in the way you need to apply it more. there is such an expression of all factors, yes, again, everything that we have said, taking into account all the circumstances. yes, you will apply legally. apply it the way it should be

applied to me. yes, vladyka's phrase may be helpful. uh, who is the author? i'm in i met her in several sources that the use of speech for other purposes is a sin. yes, that's the wrong application of the law. well, in a sense, there is. sin yeah, uh, and that's why people worry, it's when, in general, it seems to be formal, well, good rules that are developed taking into account these ideas of justice begin to be used against people against the interests of people, and then people say, this is no by conscience should be different. yes, and that's the gap between the law and the law enforcement. it unfortunately always exists in state, there are also mechanisms that are aimed at ensuring that the mechanism. let's talk. that's all the same russian legal culture. vladyka as a whole, russian culture as a whole. it took shape under the influence of orthodoxy enormously unconditionally. here is how russian legal culture and

orthodoxy influenced it, how it relates, i will give. this is a phrase that has been repeatedly heard in the meetings of the high society of the church court, in which i work as the head of staff. this is the court of appeal. us he may be the first court instances. basically it's an appeal. for priests who do not agree with the decisions of the diocesan courts, and now such a priest comes for various reasons, found guilty and sentenced to a certain church punishment, as a rule, san's decision . , well, yes, of course, he is there scoundrels yes, he also did something there, but you need to help him. it is necessary to save it, for the church, for god, maybe for service in secular courts, such an approach is possible, we generally capture. here it wait. in general, we initially lay down freedom for the judge, the discretion of the judiciary. yes, that is , the judge still applies the law based on his own inner conviction. this

is the intention precisely in that, well, i mean, returning to how it is perceived in the church , the intention is precisely to help a person, in fact. there is such a theory. e in ecclesiastical law, that ecclesiastical punishment. yes , there is a prohibition. deprivation of dignity is not a punishment. it's uh medicine it's right wrong because e is a metaphor for indicativeness, there is also a component in church punishments, but uh, in general, we are talking about the fact that a person can help, there are situations when judges, well, they chopped hard, there, for example, when a priest left his family there, he went to another woman in other situations in the case rarely happens. i just, uh, still wanted to talk about ecclesiastical hmm canon law a little later, and that's it about the influence of the context, but the religious philosophical cultural right, but let's say in textbooks on law. we will read that russian legal culture these are concentric of which, probably, can be made. that's what any right culture of these concentric. here we once andrei alexandrovich talked. he explained to me

about continental rights there. and that in similar situations, let's say continental law makes such a decision. likely to be accepted. yes, this is also about the origins of legal culture. well, it's so simple and the idea of ​​justice is different, yes. this is not necessarily connected exclusively with religious issues there with some peculiarity of development. here we mentioned press court. yes, because the jury itself. he we have a sous jury. yes, i do not want to criticize this institute. but still, if you look at the history of development, then still the jury is not aimed. on the search for truth, yes it is an adversarial process and in this adversarial process, pay attention to the word wins. yes, it is in the process that the one who best presented his position of evidence wins, the witness brought in, and so on in a sense, what was there, in fact, is a feature of the adversarial

process. pay attention there is often no one interested. what is the truth in the case? who's to blame? really not guilty. how, then, do s and law relate to justice. apparently there is an idea that the one who is right, yes, he has the best opportunity to prove this dubious position in an adversarial process. yes some in the sense of who won, he is kind. yes, it just reminds me, this is a scandinavian teag. yes, when it was decided on swords who the court fights were the same in russia if both sides could not provide. on the arguments in his rightness , that case was decided by a single judgment of god, that's all it should be. and you can, by the way, do you think it's possible? it seems that the one who is stronger wins, but let's say, the biblical story tells us that david defeated goliath because god's truth was on his side. one can consider these court fights as an attempt

to present everything to god's judgment. the source of this practice, of course, is precisely in the perception that the lord can decide. yes the lord can to point one's finger at who is right from who is wrong and david's examples of goliath are certainly one such textbook biblical example for this, although the church has treated these differently. yes, i would say that for this you still need to have such faith, which i think not all participants in these e, fights possessed or not all those present possessed, but nevertheless, this was the practice, yes.

still, the idea of ​​\u200b\u200bpeople of a certain time about that is understandable, but look at the same time , sometimes they say that legal nihilism is also it is quite such an inherent russian steam culture, characteristics, again , returning to this continuum of law, a and conscience, yes, law, there is grace, let's say or legal justice, and often ties in as well. well, how is the law what

happened? yes? there is this people. it just won't say so. here, we can say that this is a different idea of ​​the law, that the deyshlo and the legal indivisible state is, therefore, this is the question of the executor. this is a question of injustice or , uh, the formalism of the performer is conditional, well, we seem to have agreed on specific examples lead, but nonetheless. see one of my favorites. now those in quotation marks are about migrants. or rather, not about migrants, the repatriation of russian people abroad, according to the regulations. i assume that if the documents are poorly filled. they can be sent back and the person will go a second time. but it's not, it's not good. that is, it is not in good conscience, that is, the official who accepts the document, you can say, here, correct me, i will immediately accept you, although according to the regulations. he doesn't have to. it's uh, it's very primitive basic example. this is even a question illegal, but in administrative regulations, but nevertheless it is a matter of approach, how will one react or start a law, what breathes indicates that someone has acted, it’s more likely that someone has acted according to the law, since he is more comfortable.

well, that is what he said, that here are these personal characteristics to manipulate the law of their own interests, without regard for justice. yes, yes, yes, well, what was said about what. that's good, but russian legal culture is not peculiar to grass. nihilism, it is typical of any culture, at some stage it is present, but such stages as the radar accompanies mediumism, in principle, in general, i want to move on to this issue. in general, this part is being performed today, but look. i read from legal historians the idea that the existing legal nihilism of russian legal culture is largely associated with the era of peter the idea is called andrey so i don’t even see any new institutions, that peter would bring to russia

, there are legal institutions and approaches for him to touch on such fundamental things. yes, as the cathedral documents of the times of ivan the terrible acted in russia and peter they acted. to be honest, i rather see that there was a cultural problem. yes, with peter, the shock of some foundations connected with the life of people in practice. yes, an idea of ​​what is after the mind in terms of culture, life and so on. well, to say that peter somehow shook the legal culture. i didn't say, well, soviet of course not. well, of course, the church environment in the church among him, of course, was very much shaken by the institutions of the church - yes, yes, these changes, of course, were not accepted by many. but this is the same question. not uh about the un nihilism. it is not a matter of a person not accepting rights. as such, it’s a question that he doesn’t specifically

adopt these laws, these changes introduced, and peter the first or later, maybe, doesn’t like some kind of law and i’ll definitely tell you about it later, but this does not mean that i i don't think the law must exist. i just don't like legislative restoration. but, i think that, in principle, this topic is non-delism. it is not connected, there is a situation with a particular era or a historical person in general, from time to time there is a situation where the legislator, in particular, we are there. we are lagging behind in some areas from how social relations are developing, right? either this or that, the industry develops and then the people who are involved in this. they get the impression that these are the norms that have been worked out there. well, they're not at all. meet the needs. eh, this area and they begin to act without regard to these norms and it is up to the legislator to quickly tighten up the situation and propose

rules that allow this scheme to develop normally in the world. yes, i agree that these are the features that i was trying to say about, they relate to the general cultural background, but i think colleagues that you underestimate a little, well , there are some realities that well, there are attitudes towards the law expressed in russian culture, that the law can be circumvented, that the law is not necessary observe that there are things more important than laws. this is part of the legal culture they uh, let's say, uh before the revolution. yes, they were largely balanced precisely by the orthodox consciousness and the emphasis on conscience can be bypassed, but not. bypass not in conscience there relatively speaking, yes, because when some student comes up to me there, of course, this is not a legal situation. she says, you know, here, there, missed the test, missed the class. my child was born. you can treat it like a human being, but according to the law, well, you are a child i gave birth, i'm not a deuce. go there, go write. well i'm here get into the situation. yes, and i think that not in any culture, but the teacher will

walk in this, and therefore i think that there are features associated. well, it seems that you did not argue with this, yes, with national culture, but see this for sure, that for a russian, at least the sword of an orthodox person. god's truth is higher than uh, some kind of temporary, truth, yes, putting an five or two in this particular case is one thing if we sell this five, and another thing, if you give them fives throughout the year, he is a doctor, well, you don’t bring up doctors, but nonetheless. he is doctors, then he will be such a doctor that he will slaughter another thing in his patients, that he entered the situation once, well, you acted divinely, so to speak. yes, but this is it on this is very simple. answer. vladyka yes , actually, the more detailed regulation. yes, then, most likely, well, let's say that in good legislation these situations would be described, or the legislation would refer you to corporate rules, for example this educational institution, where also the corporate

norms should have been described to you. what is what to do? yes and when i punish the situation, you can't foresee it. that's right , you can't provide for every situation, but the limits of this gap are always different. we have this gap very large, very large, which you had to prove. well, again, in any case , there may be situations when a person believes that the law is unacceptable. yes, they, too, of course, can be when yes, he really believes that they are divine. well, for a christian, god's laws higher for someone may be for a person. unbelieving agnostics there, the law of conscience is higher , these are different sources about the constitution , i can’t help but ask in this composition. well, now until you asked about the constitution. i just want to say something about each , however, the legal system contains mechanisms for resolving the contradiction that i just spoke about, vladyka sava, yes, and in our country , by the way, one of such possible resolution of this contradiction is the same

constitutional one, when a person says, this law cannot be applied to me, because well, because it violates my rights. no, it doesn't make sense, yes, if it guarantees emotions, every legal system there tries to develop such mechanisms. yes , the restoration, as we say, of violated rights, even if this right is violated as a result of the application of the law, which is generally applied in accordance with all procedures there. yes, and such mechanisms exist, but do not exist in all systems of the prophets. and we have including the constitution and yet yes the constitution of the amendment. and which were adopted very important very serious about everyone. of course, we won’t talk, but i repeat in this composition the mention of god in the constitution, i just remind you just in case that the sixty-seventh article appeared. the russian federation, united by a thousand-year history, preserving the memory of the ancestors who passed on to us the ideals and faith in god , as well as the continuity of the development of the russian state, recognizes the historically established

state unity. vladyka why was it so important for the church, including you and me? we remember it well and accepted it in this participation, so that it appears in the constitution, from my point of view, this question does not rule that the constitution in this case reflects a certain idea about our country, a certain perception of our country. that is, this is a kind of ideology that is designed to set the tone for the further development of our country for application in law. yes, there was recently, uh, the decree of the president yes of spiritual and moral values ​​was adopted 807 807, yes. traditional centers, it also assumes its further e some some kind of implementation legislation in activities of the executive authorities in the activities, and the education system. here's how i perceive it, that is, for me, in this case, the constitution is not just the supreme law. yes, this is a kind of compass that indicates where our country should move, but the lord is right, in general, the constitution , as we say, is a policy, a legal

document, therefore, some basic political things. we will definitely include it in the text. yes, but it also has a legal component, it is quite simple. what are those rules of law which the state accepts or the interpretation of these rules of law will necessarily include a certain historical cultural religious, including the context. yes, of course, the legal status and everything, including the constitutional court and the legislator who creates the rules. it cannot be abstracted from this cultural historical religious context of the peoples who live here, because the idea of ​​justice is inevitably connected with this. many countries are now trying to tear off such a gap here, between the law, yes and representation, yes people of justice, which come from their history of culture, and in general in the development of our civilization yes, but we

believe that these norms. they won't take root. people, in any case, will not be able to perceive them. how is life there in conscience on the truth, or exactly how the human representation is called, the addition is very grateful, like, because it seems to me that this is the question. maybe he is so naive and philistine. he arose, well, that has changed. and what about us ordinary people? this is very good. there every the word is natural no but, i'm just saying that it's exactly the way it is not always given to convey. i think it worked out now. thanks a lot. that is, with thoughts about law and the patriotic legal culture , bishop sava, candidate of theology andrey alexandrovich, cliches, doctor of law , we continue and another topic is again a spitter. and i think, gracious sirs, that no matter how softly society treats its members. it must remember that there is justice. same math, no mathematician will say three times three nine, but for my friend 10

three times three for everyone let's talk about your favorite topic equality there is such a problem before the law today. we have, of course, and this is one of the main problems with us, of course, yes one of the main problems with the right application, because in a sense it turns our situation completely upside down, that's all we are saying now, because when people see that some escape punishment. they say, how can you judge him according to the law three times, nine said according to the law and not the obligation of the law when someone manages to avoid. well the same legal liability itself. yes, people are protesting. yes, and people believe that it is not in good conscience when a person escaped responsibility under the law, therefore, the selectivity of law enforcement is the selectivity of the law. this is a huge

problem. and we have it, unfortunately, it is, well, let's hope that like many other problems will be solved, and in the canonical rules. if i am not saying something right now, correct me, there is such a concept of economy and okrevia. o kriveya - this is a strict execution of the letter of the law, and saving - this is in general, just the same, well, leniency, probably, taking into account the circumstances there, and so on. that is, roughly speaking, there is some kind of canonical offense, according to which, according to the canons, a priest, for example, should be prohibited from serving. yes , we have such an economic norm or it is deprived. but the bishop, there the ecclesiastical court may make a different decision. yes, given the situation. yes , well, here are examples unloved by alexander, well, let's say a priest is driving in a car at the wheel, throwing himself under some kind of car. maybe a drunk person dies according to the canons, a person should be deprived of dignity because he shed blood. he cannot perform the sacraments of the church, but also and by the way,

even in a situation where, let's say, his secular court is there, can he justify? yes , because he is not to blame at all, but the church, if you follow like this, roar. yes , he must lose it, but the bishop can accept it. first of all, i would like to say a few words about this, and konstantinovich will have questions. is there any analogue of this in soviet law? well actually, that the example that he cited is now being discussed, because when a priest is driving and the man himself throws himself under the wheels, it is not the priest who shed blood, in the end shed blood. it's very specific. the thing is, after all, that is, there is such a discussion, it is not closed now. we are preparing, while considering the cathedral. uh, the russian orthodox church document, just about the punishments of the lyricists. and there this topic is discussed, with regard to savings. but that's what we've been talking about today. yes, this is when the judiciary will personally be a bishop or the church court decides what we say. so, in truth, there will be various reasons, in truth, out of

mercy, he will have mercy. it is possible, but it is already an opportunity that the church has. here, in fact. i think it exists in secular society too, because, well, we kind of touched on this topic. it will not be an exemption from punishment. yes, we talked about this and not questions, there are degrees of public danger. this is the release of responsibility, and in any law there is an institution of release of responsibility, because what is responsibility, these are some legal consequences that occur yes or do not occur in this case. if i understand correctly, vladyka, here we are simply talking about the fact that those consequences are right, which are provided for by canon law for this particular person. they don't just happen for certain reasons, and rightfully so. this is also a release of responsibility. but when we say that mercy is higher than justice, is this applicable here or is it a slightly different aspect? it seems to me that this is a different aspect, he generally has no right to relationship. yes.

eh, i don’t know, there is, in my opinion, there is also an akasina, but a statement that, like , there is the love of god there, it’s like a mountain, yes , justice is there, how it squeaks yes, it’s nice when friends are remembered inside the legal sciences. i think something like this. it seems to me that there are slightly different categories of mercy above justice. this is so this is wonderful, and the final question is another quote. another great russian lawyer anatoly fedorovich horses, he has a moral element in the criminal process. and there are such words serving justice gradually begins to apply to the judicial service. it is necessary to re-explain moral ideals. it is necessary to put moral requirements and tasks in the first place, this is the business of university teaching , the university is the alma mother of her pupils , she must nourish them with healthy, pure and strengthening milk of general guiding principles, as the lawyers wrote. eh,

do you agree on the whole with this thought and with the peculiarity that this is the case of the university. this is not obvious in my opinion. eh, look. today we are alexander talked about what the law provides. a court of certain discretion. yes. he judges in general by how he perceives it, but to judge in this way, probably. a certain moral frequency is required, if a person himself does not know, a bribe taker , uh, a lecher, and some kind of and in general scoundrels and in general a scoundrel, how he will be with uh, in a pure way to judge other people is always. well , i think it's difficult. should it be a university, not knowing if our current university is capable of it now, but i suppose yes, definitely moral the beginning should be transferred to the education system too, it may not be now, but how? i think it should be thanks. well, look at this and there is in the blood, and we increasingly began to use it. uh, this term or

concept, by the way, thanks to the constitutional court. today we are talking not only about the norms, not only about law, but also about the constitutionally significant values ​​of society, and precisely about values, because behind those very norms are the very values ​​about the idea of ​​justice of people that these norms, should generally be protected. this is the right culture. can these norms be applied to the detriment of these values? yes and then, just today, the constitutional court many times in its decisions says that our goal is to protect constitutionally significant values. yes, if we always mean it, and if the same student is at the university, he does not just learn the norm of substantive law. and so mechanistically remembering some set of articles or dispositions that are concluded there, but understands what is behind it certain values ​​that need to be protected this norm should keep these values, then, of course, his understanding of the right understanding

will be deeper. he will be able to modernize and change the same norms in the name of the very values ​​that society considers to be protected. well, that is, the university can and should do this, of course, and if you listened to the rector of st. petersburg university, professor of blood, why does he say that denty lawyers should share legal values, and only then they become real lawyers. it is universities. it is now. well, by the way, the subject for such a great discussion. you were just talking, and i remembered, uh, some kind of fiction, and an elderly lawyer, referring to a young one. says the benefit of the doubt with the heart must understand the very good. you said thank you dear friends. bishop. sava candidate of theology andrey alexandrovich cliché with doctor of law . today we gathered our thoughts about law and russian legal culture. all project podcasts podcast. lap. you can found on the channel one website.